Long runs are highly overrated

dunes runner wrote:

I disagree with people who say if you stop for 5 minutes it doesn't have an effect. That is totally silly.

Meaning some people say if you stop for 5 minutes the run doesn't "count" for some reason. That is silly.

Eating and doing a long run are not apt comparisons. What evidence do you have for not doing a long run? Thats all I am asking? What studies prove what you claim?

XCpotential wrote:

Eating and doing a long run are not apt comparisons.

Oh I think they are.

What evidence do you have for not doing a long run? Thats all I am asking? What studies prove what you claim?

Jim Peters

World record Marathon 2:20:42.2, 06/14/52, age 33

World record Marathon 2:18:40.2, 06/13/53, age 34

World record Marathon 2:18:34.8, 10/04/53, age 34

World record Marathon 2:17:39.5, 06/26/54, age 35

June/1953

...... noon .............. evening

sun .. 16 miles @ 5:42

mon ... 8 miles @ 5:21

tue ... 6 miles @ 5:17 ... 12 miles @ 5:36

wed ... 6 miles @ 5:16 ... 10 miles @ 5:36

thu ... 6 miles @ 5:22

fri ... 6.5 mile @ 5:08

sat ... marathon 2:18:40 world record @ 5:17 .. 97 miles/week

January/1954

...... noon .............. evening

sun .. 16.5 miles @ 5:43.. 10 miles @ 5:58

mon ... 8 miles @ 5:33 ... 10 miles @ 5:57

tue ... 8 miles @ 5:27 ... 10 miles @ 5:54

wed ... 8 miles @ 5:23 .... 6 miles @ 6:39

thu ... 6 miles @ 7:11 .... 6 miles @ 6:39

fri ... 6 miles @ 5:48

sat .. 15.8 miles @ 5:05.5 race

sun .. 16.5 miles @ 5:45.. 10 miles @ 5:44 .. 110 miles/week

May/1954

sat .. 20 miles @ 5:55

sun .. 17 miles @ 5:57 ... 13 miles @ 5:37

mon .. 10 miles @ 5:16.5

tue .. 10 miles @ 5:24.2.. 12 miles @ 5:52

wed .. 10 miles @ 5:03.4.. 12 miles @ 5:45.... noon run on dirt track

thu .. 5.5 mile @ 5:04.9.. 12.5 miles @ 5:34.. "

fri .. 8 miles @ 5:02.5 .. 12.5 miles @ 5:30.. " .. 144 miles/week

All training in shirt, shorts, and heavy sneakers.

Steve Jones

World record Marathon 2:08.5, 10/21/84 in first marathon

beat Olympic Champion Carlos Lopes and world ranked #1 de Castella

1985 - on 2:05 flat pace for 10 miles, ran 2:07:13

missed 2:07:12 world record held by Carlos Lopes by 1 second.

Oct/1984

...... am .................... pm

mon .. 8 miles ............... 8 miles

tue .. 7 with 4x 5:00/90s .... 8 miles

wed .. 8 miles

thu .. 8 with 8x 3:00/90s

fri .. 14 miles steady

sat .. 10 with 16x 1:00/60s .. 8 miles

sun .. 16 miles

mon .. 10 with 8x 3:00/90s

tue .. 14 miles .............. 4 miles

wed .. 8 miles ............... 6 miles

thu .. 10 with 12x 2:00/60s .. 6 miles

fri .. 6 miles

sat .. 10 miles

sat .. 15km - 43:29, 4:40 pace

sun .. 18 miles in 2:20

mon .. 10 miles .............. 8 miles

tue .. 10 with 10x 2:00/60s... 8 miles

wed .. 45 minutes steady

thu .. 40 minutes steady

fri .. 40 minutes steady, legs felt sore

sat .. 4 miles, legs felt better

sun .. first marathon, 2:08.5 world record

last 5 weeks between 70 and 100 miles a week.

Dunes Runner,

It looks like we're defining "long" a bit differently. I always considered 15 miles and beyond a long run. So by my standard guys like Peters and Clayton did long runs.

I agree with you about the Galloway system. If someone insists on trying to run a marathon on 36 miles a week I'd much rather see them do a long run of 14-16 miles and do the "lost" 20 or so miles on two or three other days.

I had a stretch of time where I did 28-30 miles every week and found that it did nothing for me except make me look forward to weekends a lot less than I once did. On the other hand, as I've tried various things to reverse the performance decline that's followed me since the late 80s, the thing I had the most success with was doing 15-18 mile runs three or four times a week. I'd get in 8-10 miles on the intervening days and had weekly mileages in the 80-90 range. This worked better than getting my mileage back up to the 100-130 range that had brought me good results in the 70s.

HRE wrote:

the thing I had the most success with was doing 15-18 mile runs three or four times a week. I'd get in 8-10 miles on the intervening days and had weekly mileages in the 80-90 range. This worked better than getting my mileage back up to the 100-130 range that had brought me good results in the 70s.

HRE - Yes, I define a long run as being one that sticks out like a sore thumb from the rest. Like Burfoot's 28 milers on 86 miles a week.

As you can see the training of Peters and Clayton is based on consistency. The same for Carlos Lopes. Many runs of 15km and no more but he ran them very quickly. Out steady and back fast.

I have had the same experience as you have. When I ran seven 22 milers in a row in 5 weeks (a number of years ago) it didn't help to make me any stronger or faster. And it did hurt the consistant mileage, that I went back to and got the better results.

I did enjoy running two, sometimes three, 17 or 18 milers every week. But as the overall mileage was higher didn't consider them to be "long" runs. Just "longer" than the rest of them. But now I think even those were too long, and more shorter faster ones are much better.

From this discussion I have been reading over some of the materials, such as from Jim Peters. Time gives a different perspective on things, which is helpful.

For the third time in this thread:

Long Runs:

-Increase leg strength

-Increases overall accumulated volume of mileage

-Increases the capillarization of muscle fibers

-Increases the number of mitochondria in the cells

-Increases the enzyme activity within the mitochondria

-Increases the myoglobin in the muscle cells

-Increases the muscle's ability to store glycogen

-Recruits fast-twitch fibers to have a higher aerobic capacity than normal

-Strengthens all the ligaments, tendons, muscles and bones of the body

Now we simplify:

An increase in leg strength, mileage volume, capillarization, mitochondria density, myoglobin, enzyme activity, glycogen storage, fast-twitch oxidation, connective tissue stength, ALL has been proven to benefit races of MANY distances from 5k to the marathon. This has been proven by the many exploits of the many elite runners in the world. You will find that most do indeed run some type of long run and just because an outlier is successful does not disprove anything. So, what is a long run? A long run is individualized. What one considers long another may consider a normal easy run. I used to think 10 was long, then it was 14 and now it's 20 and 14 is a normal easy run.

Alan

You're wasting too much time.

Dunse Runner, you are the definitive boardwank. You glossed right over the 30 and 27 milers a week apart, taken directly from Clayton's journal. Those are LONG RUNS by even your facile, weasely definitions. Case closed. Now go pray that some day Paula will let you kiss the sole of her shoe after she has run through a crowded cow pasture.

That's called TAPERING dumbass. If you showed the months leading up to these races, then maybe you might have a point. But right now, you have no evidence dunes runner.

i think there is a lot to be said for quick and shorter miles and long and slower miles. Just my training philosophy. Different mileages work for different people

run fast not long

god you're a f***. you ignore every salient point against you to cherry pick at things barely related to the topic.

also, to whoever said lydiard is misunderstood with LSD - completely agree. however, slow, as someone else said, is relative. im sure when martin and coe say slow for 5/10ers, they mean as fast as comfy, and probably the same for snell.

although - i wonder if the way khannouchi does long runs could be beneficial for 5/10 types. instead of an all out last 2 miles, an all out last mile. or maybe the same, with a little less distance. who knows? certainly not run fast not long.

Bumping this up for 2020.

WOW! Even 17 years ago Dunce Runner was an annoying clown on the boards. THAT is consistency.

I believe that’s wrong. 2 hr+ runs have shown to develop new capillaries, improving blood flow and oxygen. Seems to work for me from experience

I agree with spider cu m.

There’s no point to a long run. Just run 13 on an easy day twice per week and you get virtually all of the benefits. I only find it to be useful for xc

Hey, OP, the 1990s called and they want their training plan back.

As a novice 17 minute 5k runner, long runs did not improve my fitness. I did them on anything from 35 to 70 mpw. In fact, I currently run 35 mpw and I question the point of doing a 10 miler anymore. Sometimes I have a nice run but often it feels like a boring slog, especially when the weather is hot.